SciRisk-Bench: A Risk-Dimension-Aware Benchmark for AI4Science Safety

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in AI for Science (AI4Science) workflows, from scientific question answering and literature analysis to laboratory planning and autonomous discovery. This progress creates an urgent need for safety benchmarks that evaluate not only scientific competence, but also whether models recognize and avoid risks in high-stakes scientific contexts. Existing AI4Science safety datasets cover several disciplines and task formats, leaving the underlying risk dimensions underspecified. We introduce \textbf{SciRisk-Bench}, a benchmark designed to evaluate AI4Science safety from two complementary perspectives: explicit risk dimensions and scientific disciplines. SciRisk-Bench covers 7 disciplines, 31 subdisciplines and 10 risk dimensions. In the experimental section, we evaluate both mainstream LLMs and science-oriented LLMs across risk dimensions, disciplines, and sub-disciplines, enabling fine-grained diagnosis of where scientific models remain unsafe.

VESTA: A Fully Automated Scenario Generation and Safety Evaluation Framework for LLM Agents

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly evolving from simple text-based interaction systems into LLM agents that can maintain memory, use tools, access external environments, and execute tasks. As their capabilities and autonomy expand, the safety risks they face also become more diverse. Existing evaluations often rely on manually written scenarios, static prompts, or final-output judgments, making it difficult to capture the diverse risks that agents may face during task execution. We introduce VESTA, a fully automated scenario generation and safety evaluation framework for LLM agents. Based on five risk dimensions, VESTA instantiaes abstract and diverse safety risks in real-world task execution into 1,072 measurable evaluation scenarios. Using the automated evaluation pipeline, 12 LLM agents are evaluated under two authority contexts. The results show that current agents still face substantial behavioral safety risks during task execution, with an average ASR of 47.1% and several models exceeding 70%. These findings demonstrate the importance of executable, process-level evaluation for understanding and improving LLM agent safety.

MVPBench: A Benchmark and Fine-Tuning Framework for Aligning Large Language Models with Diverse Human Values

The alignment of large language models (LLMs) with human values is critical for their safe and effective deployment across diverse user populations. However, existing benchmarks often neglect cultural and demographic diversity, leading to limited understanding of how value alignment generalizes globally. In this work, we introduce MVPBench, a novel benchmark that systematically evaluates LLMs' alignment with multi-dimensional human value preferences across 75 countries. MVPBench contains 24,020 high-quality instances annotated with fine-grained value labels, personalized questions, and rich demographic metadata, making it the most comprehensive resource of its kind to date. Using MVPBench, we conduct an in-depth analysis of several state-of-the-art LLMs, revealing substantial disparities in alignment performance across geographic and demographic lines. We further demonstrate that lightweight fine-tuning methods, such as Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), can significantly enhance value alignment in both in-domain and out-of-domain settings. Our findings underscore the necessity for population-aware alignment evaluation and provide actionable insights for building culturally adaptive and value-sensitive LLMs. MVPBench serves as a practical foundation for future research on global alignment, personalized value modeling, and equitable AI development.

Redefining Superalignment: From Weak-to-Strong Alignment to Human-AI Co-Alignment to Sustainable Symbiotic Society

Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are becoming increasingly powerful and autonomous, and may progress to surpass human intelligence levels, namely Artificial Superintelligence (ASI). During the progression from AI to ASI, it may exceed human control, violate human values, and even lead to irreversible catastrophic consequences in extreme cases. This gives rise to a pressing issue that needs to be addressed: superalignment, ensuring that AI systems much smarter than humans, remain aligned with human (compatible) intentions and values. Existing scalable oversight and weak-to-strong generalization methods may prove substantially infeasible and inadequate when facing ASI. We must explore safer and more pluralistic frameworks and approaches for superalignment. In this paper, we redefine superalignment as the human-AI co-alignment towards a sustainable symbiotic society, and highlight a framework that integrates external oversight and intrinsic proactive alignment. External oversight superalignment should be grounded in human-centered ultimate decision, supplemented by interpretable automated evaluation and correction, to achieve continuous alignment with humanity's evolving values. Intrinsic proactive superalignment is rooted in a profound understanding of the self, others, and society, integrating self-awareness, self-reflection, and empathy to spontaneously infer human intentions, distinguishing good from evil and proactively considering human well-being, ultimately attaining human-AI co-alignment through iterative interaction. The integration of externally-driven oversight with intrinsically-driven proactive alignment empowers sustainable symbiotic societies through human-AI co-alignment, paving the way for achieving safe and beneficial AGI and ASI for good, for human, and for a symbiotic ecology.

AI Governance InternationaL Evaluation Index (AGILE Index)

The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology is profoundly transforming human society and concurrently presenting a series of ethical, legal, and social issues. The effective governance of AI has become a crucial global concern. Since 2022, the extensive deployment of generative AI, particularly large language models, marked a new phase in AI governance. Continuous efforts are being made by the international community in actively addressing the novel challenges posed by these AI developments. As consensus on international governance continues to be established and put into action, the practical importance of conducting a global assessment of the state of AI governance is progressively coming to light. In this context, we initiated the development of the AI Governance InternationaL Evaluation Index (AGILE Index). Adhering to the design principle, "the level of governance should match the level of development," the inaugural evaluation of the AGILE Index commences with an exploration of four foundational pillars: the development level of AI, the AI governance environment, the AI governance instruments, and the AI governance effectiveness. It covers 39 indicators across 18 dimensions to comprehensively assess the AI governance level of 14 representative countries globally. The index is utilized to delve into the status of AI governance to date in 14 countries for the first batch of evaluation. The aim is to depict the current state of AI governance in these countries through data scoring, assist them in identifying their governance stage and uncovering governance issues, and ultimately offer insights for the enhancement of their AI governance systems.